Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
The one I copied.
Yes I did read it carefully.
The phrase that I don’t think is met which
To me this statement requires causality. The unexpected function happens when the person approaches, disturbs, or performs the act. Based what we know Israel intentionally detonated these devices. Ie no booby trap was tripped. If you look through that page of the document it might meet the “other devices clause” about remote munitions
But the “other devices” doesn’t apply to the section in article 6 (page 37) of the attachment that was referenced in the video. That only applies to booby traps.
I think there could be debate around proportionality and indiscriminate killing here as there are clauses discussing that.
I think in a court of law I don’t think it’s a slam dunk that they would have broken this treaty.
|
For the record I think this is wild. Hard to say more than that.